zeuszor:

You say you were "awestruck" and that somehow "meeting him was like meeting Neil Armstrong". You then poured him a cup of tea and he offered you a job as his research assistant. You explain that Bob and Judy Pardon introduced you to Steve Hassan after you graduated from Meadowhaven, which is their ministry for former cult members. As Dr. Mann points out the Pardons "get work and referrals from Hassan."

You now see Steve Hassan as your "boss", "friend" and "he has helped [you] in an enormous fashion, both personally and professionally". He also knows all about your history at this message board as "zeuszor", which you have explained to him "at length".

Now you wish to extoll his virtues as "a highly compassionate, sensitive and ethical man, and a man of great integrity". You go on to say "I respect Steve, I trust Steve, and I like Steve. He is my employer and in that respect he is my 'boss', but he is NOT my 'leader'". You also insist that he is not your "guru". And you want people to know that you "do not put the man on a pedestal"?

It seems to me that Hassan has become both your boss and guru, and that you have put him on a pedestal. Apaprently there are also little if any meaningful boundaries in your relationship.

I asked you previously if you worked as a subcontractor for Mr. Hassan, i.e. without benefits and paying your own self-employment tax. You refused to answer.

Fine.

But now you want people reading this thread to believe that "nobody is exploiting [you], much less Steve".

The facts seem to indicate otherwise.

Steve Hassan charges clients $125.00 an hour for research performed through his for-profit business "Freedom of Mind" (FOF) and you are the FOF researcher. Hassan charges no less than $200.00 for 45 minutes of his time according to information published on his Web site and other documents previously discussed here.

Who is doing the FOF research billed at $125.00 an hour?

It appears that you provide that service and whatever Steve Hassan pays you, I strongly suspect, is a fraction of the amount he bills to clients.

Pretty neat trick don't you think?

FYI -- the topic of this thread is not how Steve Hassan treats his colleagues, though it seems you are not treated all that well. The topic is Hassan's recently self-published book and the review of that book posted here. What the review discusses is Steve Hassan's penchant for copying the ideas of others without attribution, which can be seen as plagiarism, and also the overblown and unproven claims he often makes among other things.

Read the review.

See [www.cultnews.com]

Frankly, your posts on this thread do seem to indicate that you are entralled with Steve Hassan like a "guru", accept what he says as "gospel" and are seemingly so devoted that you behave like a person involved in "some kind of 'anti-cult cult'".

If you use your own independent critical thinking and read Dr. Mann's book review she makes very valid points.

Also, if you review the links and information now posted on this thread you can see a pattern regarding the behavior and business practices of Steve Hassan.

Read the books "Snapping", "Cults in Our Midst", "Holy Terror", "Captive Hearts, Captive Minds" and note their ideas and footnotes.

Flo Conway and Jim Siegelman wrote about information control and emotional control years before Steve Hassan wrote his first book.

Hassan even admits within one video on YouTube that the BITE model name was actually the suggestion of Buddy Martin, an evangelist that once worked with him on interventions.

And as Dr. Mann points out in her review Steve Hassan's SIA process is little more than incorporating long established counseling techniques with what he learned as a cult deprogrammer.

Where are Steve Hassan's footnotes and attributions in his books giving proper credit to those who actually originated and first wrote about the concepts and ideas he uses?

Is that ethical? Does that reflect someone with professional integrity?

I don't think so, but then I don't work for Steve Hassan.



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2012 04:39AM by rrmoderator.

Cathleen Mann, PhD:

The FBI did not "use firebombs" as Steve Hassan claims in his book.

See [www.culteducation.com]

Also see [www.culteducation.com]

This is the complete Danforth Report.

The FBI used "pyrotechnic devices", which "were fired four hours before the fire and had nothing to do with the destruction of the Branch Davidian complex in Texas."

There are other congressional reports by both Republicans and Democrats that confirm the same.

Lawsuits filed against the government by Davidian survivors and their families made similar allegations against the FBI. Their lawsuits were dismissed.

See [www.culteducation.com]

See also [www.culteducation.com]

The appeal was also rejected.

Its incredible, irresponsible and just plain stupid that Steve Hassan would put such an outrageous and false statement in his book. No responsible editor and/or publisher would have let that through, no wonder his book is self-published. Doesn't he fact check anything? Is it possible he doesn't know how to use the Internet for research purposes?

I was consulted by both the BATF and FBI, though the FBI later denied this in part. Much of what I suggested was ignored and mistakes were made. But David Koresh totally controlled that compound and he was a psychopath.

See [www.culteducation.com]

This "Time Magazine" article features pyschiatrists discussing Koresh.

Steve Hassan once told me that he might have successfully deprogrammed David Koresh if he had been given the opportunity. When I explained to him that you cannot deprogram a psychopath Hassan responded that Koresh was not a psychopath.

Incredible.

As you may recall I worked as a CBS news analyst during the Waco Davidian standoff and was often interviewed during the standoff by the media. I had deprogrammed two Davidians successfully and worked with a number of concerned families affected by the group going back to 1987.

See [www.culteducation.com]

Steve Hassan seems to be bitter that he did not play a prominent role in some way regarding Waco.

The book excerpt comes across as both arrogant and unprofessional.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2012 04:44AM by rrmoderator.

It's quite a telling feat to work for someone so blindly that you don't read reviews or even Hassan's newest bok, Brian. But, I like to be informed before I swear fidelity to someone who makes me "awestruck." Many people here are former cult members. They have a right to full disclosure of what they are getting into and the nature and adulation of someone without evidence or how it affects their recovery. If you don't remain curious and skeptical, you have the danger of cult hopping, or affiliating yourself with another wolf in sheep's clothing.

Brian, since you said that Hassan had forbidden to let you particpate in this thread, you might want to consider the folliwng phrase from his latest book that you haven't read:

Hassan (2012, p. 206) states:
"Cult members are expected to surrender autonomy, and often must ask for permission for routine activities, like using the bathroom. As a result, ex members can agonize over the smallest of decisions--what to eat, wear, read, when to sleep. [emphasis added] After an intervention, they sometimes shift their devotion from a cult leader to a counselor or other Team member. Friends and family should be sensitive to possible tendencies toward dependence or transference of loyalty...Since one of your goals is to help your loved one act independently, be sensitive and gently encourage them to make his own choices [sic]. Avoid the tendency to tell him what to do."

Maybe you should read that book after all, Brian.

Oh, of course I plan on studying the book out in the next couple of weeks. Probably I will read Combating and Releasing again, too.

And where did I "swear fidelity" to Steve and FOM, Dr. Mann?

You make it sound as if I have a little framed photo of Steve on my wall that I meditate in front of or something (sarcasm).

Cheap shot. I wrote that I respect Steve, but I also wrote that I realize that everybody has feet of clay. Please do not put words in my mouth, so to speak. With all due respect.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2012 03:28AM by zeuszor.

Like I wrote from my very first post on this thread: all of you are going to accuse me of being in Steve's pocket as some kind of apologist or shill, pretty much no matter what I write here (unless my sentiments conform to your point of view). Thank you, and goodbye. I'll read the book soon.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2012 03:33AM by zeuszor.

I bet many of the general public interested in this area, want to hear what Steven Hassan has to say, in his own words, and in writing, on these issues and subjects, in great detail.

Steven Hassan is the author of his book, the owner of his business and his websites, so its his views that are relevant.

Sadly, the book is not available in the public libraries, as its not a general release book at this time it seems.

Something like this is not personal, and in fact, should be strictly professional, and only about the technical facts, like fees, and processes, and the hard research, or lack thereof, behind the processes.
As well as measuring the results of various approaches.

Brian/zeuszor:

Please do read both Steve Hassan's recently released book and Dr. Mann's review of that book posted on this thread.

Note my last entry and Dr. Mann's entry regarding the false statement Steve Hassan made about Waco. This is just another example of what's wrong with his book.

You don't have to conform to anyone's point of view.

But you must stay on topic and observe the rules of the message board.

The Anticult:

Steve Hassan probably will not respond in any direct way.

He seems to prefer ad hominem attacks through third parties.

Me thinks you doth protest too much, Brian.

From the book p. 238.

Hassan (2012) says, "This is one point where I disagree with Margaret Singer and others. According to my model, the military uses many components of mind control. What the military does not do is deceive a new recruit (some vets have argued with me about this because they said their recruiter lied to them). The structural checks and balances operating in the military provide some protection of an individual's authentic self" [emphasis added].

This authentic self notion is a creation of Hassan's mind. There is nothing in the research or professional literature that supports this term. It is completely made up. And who gets to decide what someone's authentic self consists of? Does Hassan do this? If so, that is too much power over an individual's identity and is dangerous, IMO.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2012 04:14AM by Cathleen Mann, PhD.

On pps. 105-106, Hassan spends a few paragraphs explaining how to deal with what he calls "[The] demonization of cult critics." He gives these comments as a method of analysis...

Sound familiar?

Hassan (2012) says,
"When evaluating any piece of information, ask yourself:
What is the source of the criticism?
How is the source funded?
Who exactly is making the accusations?
What are this person's verifiable credentials?
What is his standing in the academic and scientific community?
What is his training? His experience? His reputation?
What has this person published?
Have you read his work? Does what he or he says make sense to you?
When you question them, do they answer honestly and responsibly?" [emphasis added].

My mere request is that Hassan respond with how this list applies to him and his work. I don't want surrogates, advocates, followers, and devoted employees answering the question. Since Hassan has placed himself in a lofty position to judge others, can he meet these criteria himself?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2012 06:01AM by Cathleen Mann, PhD.